Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Voted three times.


I did a heel face turn and voted Plaid Cymru.


I'm shocked too.

I'm not voting, I have no idea who the candidates are nor even who actually controls the local council. Partly this is due to apathy/disinterest but I also as I move every three years so a this stage I don't even know who my local MP is.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:
I'm not voting, I have no idea who the candidates are nor even who actually controls the local council. Partly this is due to apathy/disinterest but I also as I move every three years so a this stage I don't even know who my local MP is.

Close your eyes poke at the ballot paper; whichever your finger is closest to gets your vote.

It's at least as democratic of a process as the voting itself.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:
I'm not voting, I have no idea who the candidates are nor even who actually controls the local council. Partly this is due to apathy/disinterest but I also as I move every three years so a this stage I don't even know who my local MP is.

Or at least, spoil the ballot if you have no interest in anybody.

So far as I know, its just the Police Commissioner elections in my town... my bathroom's almost run out of toilet paper. Might as well put the taxpayers money to use somehow.

I voted for the police thing, but only because I went to vote for the assembly elections. Like killkrazy I think it's a waste of time and not something we really need, I withheld my vote last time around too. And I'm one of those people that thinks everyone should vote, so it was a pretty big deal for me not to vote.

 Avatar 720 wrote:

 Silent Puffin? wrote:
I'm not voting, I have no idea who the candidates are nor even who actually controls the local council. Partly this is due to apathy/disinterest but I also as I move every three years so a this stage I don't even know who my local MP is.

Close your eyes poke at the ballot paper; whichever your finger is closest to gets your vote.

It's at least as democratic of a process as the voting itself.

Wouldn't work in Scotland - because we have proportional representation, the ballot paper is two feet long due to the high number of candidates!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 welshhoppo wrote:
Voted three times.


I did a heel face turn and voted Plaid Cymru.


I'm shocked too.

As am I!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Normally, on election night, I'd stay up all night, but the counting won't be finished til 6am, it's not a general election, and I'd be better saving my stamina for June 23rd.

Plus, I can't be bothered listening to Paddy Ashdown when he gets wheeled out to state the bleeding obvious!

 Yodhrin wrote:

Doesn't that rather defeat the intended purpose though? If PCCs are supposed to provide oversight, anyone but a former copper(who would doubtless continue their fine tradition of sweeping anything uncomfortable under the rug and quietly shuffling the worst wrongdoers into retirement) would seem to be a better candidate.

Thing is though, I'd rather someone who has experience in the field get the job than a party political placeman. A nice idea in principle but a massive politicisation of the police in practice.

As for the bent copper comment, the same could be said about party political candidates.

Anyone else feel that a crayon would be a more suitable writing implement for scrawling a cross in those huge boxes? Just went and voted. Long Live the Galactic Republic.

"2016 bad start for lib dems. Coun Stuart bodsworth (cheadle Hulme south) announces defection to labour minute after polls shut."

Nice to show that anyone who still trusted Lib Dems was wrong to do so.

My constituency remains Tory, and after our showing, likely will for the next few local elections to come.

GG.

Looks like the Liberals are going to hold Shetland, and they've retained Orkney as well, seems they picked up virtually all the previous independent candidate votes and a goodly number of unionist tactical votes as well.

The voting station being right by a takeaway had no influence at all on my decision to vote, having finished work late....

As for turnout, I literally had to fold my paper into a slither to fit it into the ballot box, it was that cramped. The feth? Scotland's one of those neo-European states where voting's mandatory all of a sudden.

Well gak the bed, SNP have taken James Kelly's seat in Rutherglen.

The SNP's two seats from a majority government here, with the Tories taking 14 more seats than last year (from talking to the golden oldies here, I'm thinking that's because a perceived anti-EU agenda. Perceived). Its being sold as the Tories being Scotland's second party, which yes they are, but hardly by a landslide. Labour has only a few less seats.

As for actual voting trends, its the same as last year. SNP yellow everywhere, bar the Tories taking the borders.

England's gone to Labour oddly enough. Their leader's politics are all over the place, but as ever, I'd take anything over a Conservative government. As ever, the BBC's spin is that Labor is failing and mentions how great the Tories are in every article.

No mention of all the election fraud which went on.

Angus McPherson re-eected Crime Commissioner for Wiltshire on a 25% turnout, up from 15% in 2012.

Turnout in Corwall was under 19%.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
SNP have failed to get a majority in Scottish Parliament.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Angus McPherson re-eected Crime Commissioner for Wiltshire on a 25% turnout, up from 15% in 2012.

Turnout in Corwall was under 19%.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
SNP have failed to get a majority in Scottish Parliament.

Considering the SNP were a whisker away from gaining a second majority on a system that was designed to prevent majorities...well, that's one hell of an achievement.

With the support of the Scottish Greens who are pro-indy, a second independence referendum is still possible in Scotland, so no worries there.

An SNP minority government or in coalition with the Greens, doesn't bother me either, as it will keep the SNP honest.

Overall, this is a good result.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Yodhrin wrote:
Well gak the bed, SNP have taken James Kelly's seat in Rutherglen.

It's independence or bust for the Labour party in Scotland, now. The battle lines are drawn in Scotland: Indy Vs. Union.

Labour are getting squeezed to death by both sides.

But, being totally useless, I expect Scottish Labour to order the Titanic to increase speed towards the iceberg!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Avatar 720 wrote:
"2016 bad start for lib dems. Coun Stuart bodsworth (cheadle Hulme south) announces defection to labour minute after polls shut."

Nice to show that anyone who still trusted Lib Dems was wrong to do so.

My constituency remains Tory, and after our showing, likely will for the next few local elections to come.

GG.

The Lib Dems have to be the most useless political party I have ever seen in my life. What do they stand for? What do they do?

If you offered me a billion quid and ten years to come up with an answer, I would struggle.

The SNP increased their share of the vote from their 2011 majority, but as aforementioned the system is designed to prevent majorities and that previous result was an oddity.

That said, I'm not feeling quite as gracious towards the Greens, who are directly responsible for losing the SNP at least one seat(Edin. Central) to the Tories by standing a spoiler candidate when they knew they had no hope of winning and who have got that odious wee gak Ross Greer elected on their list, nor towards RISE and Green voters who were deliberately spoiling their constituency ballots out of some petty sentiment that the SNP weren't doing enough to get their parties elected or some nonsense.

The Meeja(and that droning buffoon Massie has already started) will doubtless attempt to paint this result as Scotland getting back into line with rUK left-right politics and also as a resurgence of Unionism, but of course that's spin because barring Green spoilers almost all of the Tories' gains have been at the expense of Labour's vote share - the story yesterday was of working class Orange capital-U Unionists backing the party with the strongest commitment to unionism despite its socioeconomic leanings, and of Labour's recent incoherence driving many shy-Tory Blairites back to their natural home - I doubt many folk's opinions have changed, they're just being realistic about their priorities.

Some journos are also already staking out the line that anyone with a brain knew they would take; a "pro-indy majority" is irrelevant, share of the vote is irrelevant, without an outright SNP majority the media will back the UK parties to the hilt when they insist, should the circumstances arise, there's no possible mandate for a post-Brexit indyref, so that's us then. Even if we vote 60/40 to stay and the rest of the UK vote to leave, and the polling afterward showed a solid majority in favour of a second indyref and of a Yes victory, we'll be scunnered.

The SNP dependent on the Greens for a majority will make for a fine devolved government, but I'm pessimistic it will be as solid a foundation for winning independence as an outright SNP majority would have been.

EDIT: As for Labour, well, we'll see. The writing would appear to be on the wall for their previous strategy, but most people thought that in '07, '11, and '15 as well, and they doubled-down on pig-headed obstinate obstructionism and sectarian pandering all three times. Considering their ranks will still be composed of such numinous personalities as Jackie Baillie, James Kelly, and Anas Sarwar, I don't think anyone should place any bets on them suddenly discovering their self-awareness and remembering that their enemy is supposed to be the Tories who're imposing the cuts on our budget not the SNP government trying to mitigate them as much as is practicable.

 Wyrmalla wrote:


England's gone to Labour oddly enough. Their leader's politics are all over the place, but as ever, I'd take anything over a Conservative government. As ever, the BBC's spin is that Labor is failing and mention

Correct me if I'm wrong, but according to the last set of results? Haven't Labour shed a number of seats/got less than they had before the elections? With a handful each thrown to the Lib Dems and Tories, and most to UKIP?

I think it's somewhat hard to trumpet a net loss as a victory. I suppose you could look at it from the 'they're still doing better than the rest perspective', but considering Corbyn was meant to be the next coming according to many of his supporters, it's not quite the result some were expecting.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Turnout in Cornwall was under 19%.

Last time I skyped my pa back home in Penzance, he said he couldn't be arsed to vote as it was only for the police commissioner or something and he viewed it as nonsense.

Ketara: The media were expecting a loss of up to 200 seats (150 was the most common prediction.) Lots of Tory supporters saying the same thing.

So holding steady, within a margin of error in seat percentages, is not great, but not as bad as people were expecting him to do either.

Neil Hamilton gets elected to the Welsh assembly as a UKIP member!

Talk about the dead walking the earth


Automatically Appended Next Post:
hands up if you voted for a police commissioner

 Da Boss wrote:
Ketara: The media were expecting a loss of up to 200 seats (150 was the most common prediction.) Lots of Tory supporters saying the same thing.

So holding steady, within a margin of error in seat percentages, is not great, but not as bad as people were expecting him to do either.

Since Corbyn's election as leader the Blairite wing of the party has been painting him as a dangerous loony lefty got into power by agitprop and malarkey, and that he inevitably will lose them the next election because Corbynism is fundamentally unpopular with the general public. So the fact he's done OK in this "mid-term" batch of elections perhaps tells us something about the relative popularity of the Corbynite and the Blairite rump.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Ketara: The media were expecting a loss of up to 200 seats (150 was the most common prediction.) Lots of Tory supporters saying the same thing.

So holding steady, within a margin of error in seat percentages, is not great, but not as bad as people were expecting him to do either.

Since Corbyn's election as leader the Blairite wing of the party has been painting him as a dangerous loony lefty got into power by agitprop and malarkey, and that he inevitably will lose them the next election because Corbynism is fundamentally unpopular with the general public. So the fact he's done OK in this "mid-term" batch of elections perhaps tells us something about the relative popularity of the Corbynite and the Blairite rump.

The general opinion of the public here would appear to be a 'mild negative' judging by the results. They've slid down to third place in Scotland behind the Tories, they've lost around thirty council seats, and control of the Welsh Assembly. Saying 'Well, it could have been catastrophic, and it seems like not EVERYONE hates him' or 'They're hanging on' as a positive just seems daft to me.

If you can't score points off an unpopular Conservative Government effectively in their second term, and indeed actually /lose ground (however little it may be), you're doing pretty badly. What this confirms in my eyes, is that Corbyn cannot win the next election. He's had almost a year to make his mark, and the result (as clearly indicated by the election results) is one of mild disdain/indifference.

I don't think he can either, but I don't think the Blairites have much of a hope.

The point is Corbyn is supposed to have been a disaster and he hasn't.


On a more cheerful note, the results for PCC elections are trickling and and so far the highest turnout is a fairly puny 31%.I think the final average will be about 25%.

 Ketara wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Ketara: The media were expecting a loss of up to 200 seats (150 was the most common prediction.) Lots of Tory supporters saying the same thing.

So holding steady, within a margin of error in seat percentages, is not great, but not as bad as people were expecting him to do either.

Since Corbyn's election as leader the Blairite wing of the party has been painting him as a dangerous loony lefty got into power by agitprop and malarkey, and that he inevitably will lose them the next election because Corbynism is fundamentally unpopular with the general public. So the fact he's done OK in this "mid-term" batch of elections perhaps tells us something about the relative popularity of the Corbynite and the Blairite rump.

The general opinion of the public here would appear to be a 'mild negative' judging by the results. They've slid down to third place in Scotland behind the Tories, they've lost around thirty council seats, and control of the Welsh Assembly. Saying 'Well, it could have been catastrophic, and it seems like not EVERYONE hates him' or 'They're hanging on' as a positive just seems daft to me.

If you can't score points off an unpopular Conservative Government effectively in their second term, and indeed actually /lose ground (however little it may be), you're doing pretty badly. What this confirms in my eyes, is that Corbyn cannot win the next election. He's had almost a year to make his mark, and the result (as clearly indicated by the election results) is one of mild disdain/indifference.

And the result with a managerial Blairite windsock would likely have been far worse, or do you think Liz Kendall or Andy Burnham would really be doing any better?

The problem with Labour isn't Corbyn, the problem with Labour is Labour. They're being eaten from the left by voter apathy in England and nationalists in Scotland & Wales because they're too spineless to stand up for their policy agenda to the Murdoch press and insist on attacking each other(England) or the wrong opponents(SNP in Scotland) rather than the Tories' record and policies, but they don't make any gains from the right as a result because the fundamental lesson of Blairism was that if you want Tory policies you're best to vote for Tory governments, and the right-leaning centrists in English swing constituencies learned it well. In Scotland their woes are compounded twice; once by the loss of the Orange-tendency Unionist bloc to the Tories and again by the results of their own historical era of incompetent nepotism coming back to haunt them as they struggle to find decent candidates or a leader that can maintain the same policy position for more than two days in a row.

Labour won't lose the next election because of Corbyn, Corbyn will lose the next election because he's Labour. Blair and Brown did a huge amount of damage to the party and they won't be elected again unless they either sit down, stop sniping at each other like petty children, work out what they actually stand for and then go out to the public and win those arguments, or else wait for the Tories to implode in whatever the next monstrous sex or money scandal turns out to be in a decade's time. Now Corbyn hasn't been hugely impressive in that regard, frankly he needs to live up to the rhetoric of his PLP opponents and get a little bit iron fisty with the rump of whingers, but this idea that if only Labour would go back to the days of Take That songs and spin doctors everything will be all right is facile - if Labour want to win, they have to put in the work first, and step one in that process is accepting the reality that it isn't "Corbynism" that's unpopular, it's the Labour Party, not because the whole country have turned into Tories but because centrists don't trust a bunch of backbiting school children in suits to run the country and the party's treatment of the left has thrown away most of the enthusiasm and activist base of their traditional support.

Tories have lost London, and now they're backing down on their academy plans....

Dear o Dear, what a difference a year makes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I don't think he can either, but I don't think the Blairites have much of a hope.

The point is Corbyn is supposed to have been a disaster and he hasn't.


On a more cheerful note, the results for PCC elections are trickling and and so far the highest turnout is a fairly puny 31%.I think the final average will be about 25%.

Feeling nostalgic for the 1990s, what with Neil Hamilton back in power?

 Yodhrin wrote:


And the result with a managerial Blairite windsock would likely have been far worse, or do you think Liz Kendall or Andy Burnham would really be doing any better?

The problem with Labour isn't Corbyn, the problem with Labour is Labour.....Labour won't lose the next election because of Corbyn, Corbyn will lose the next election because he's Labour......

See, that's the problem I have with that. He's the leader of the Labour Party. His literal job description is that he represents the party, and directs the policies that they come up with to try and get elected. And he's made those clear. Yet, despite that, he still can't get the votes. I'm not naive/intellectually dishonest enough to claim that Labour isn't dragging a certain amount of baggage around from the Brown/Blair days, but we're long past those now. In the same way the Tories can't really blame the state of the economy on the last Labour administration any longer, so Corbyn can't really blame his lack of success on them either.

Unfortunately for Labour, I regard these elections as showing the general opinion of Corbyn and co, namely 'a general mild dislike/disdain'. I'm not saying they need to go back to the days of Blair to be successful, so please don't put those words in my mouth. My opinion is quite simple really, which is that Corbyn's policies and leadership are ultimately no more popular than the Blairite style. He's not scoring badly because people associate him with them (the number of headlines outlining him as a menace have differentiated him plenty in the public eye), but rather because he hasn't offered anything anyone wants. His failure to capitalise on the political situation is far more down Corbyn's faults in his own leadership style and political agenda, than they are the ghost of Brown and a handful of whinging MP's doing the occasional leak of his more left-wing views/sympathies.

 Ketara wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:


And the result with a managerial Blairite windsock would likely have been far worse, or do you think Liz Kendall or Andy Burnham would really be doing any better?

The problem with Labour isn't Corbyn, the problem with Labour is Labour.....Labour won't lose the next election because of Corbyn, Corbyn will lose the next election because he's Labour......

See, that's the problem I have with that. He's the leader of the Labour Party. His literal job description is that he represents the party, and directs the policies that they come up with to try and get elected. And he's made those clear. Yet, despite that, he still can't get the votes. I'm not naive/intellectually dishonest enough to claim that Labour isn't dragging a certain amount of baggage around from the Brown/Blair days, but we're long past those now. In the same way the Tories can't really blame the state of the economy on the last Labour administration any longer, so Corbyn can't really blame his lack of success on them either.

That might have some merit if not for the fact that the legacy of Blair and Brown didn't end with Blair and Brown, the Blairites continued to make themselves felt in policy all through Miliband's tenure as leader(or are we forgetting the "we'll be tougher on benefits than the Tories"/"we're the party of workers not dole claimants" phase?), and now spend their days actively trying to undermine Corbyn with press briefings.

Unfortunately for Labour, I regard these elections as showing the general opinion of Corbyn and co, namely 'a general mild dislike/disdain'. I'm not saying they need to go back to the days of Blair to be successful, so please don't put those words in my mouth. My opinion is quite simple really, which is that Corbyn's policies and leadership are ultimately no more popular than the Blairite style. He's not scoring badly because people associate him with them (the number of headlines outlining him as a menace have differentiated him plenty in the public eye), but rather because he hasn't offered anything anyone wants. His failure to capitalise on the political situation is far more down Corbyn's faults in his own leadership style and political agenda, than they are the ghost of Brown and a handful of whinging MP's doing the occasional leak of his more left-wing views/sympathies.

I disagree strongly. Whatever Corbyn's flaws, I don't think he could have done better, not because people don't want his policies(check the polls, the electorate is substantially more "leftist" on many subjects than even Corbyn, their views are simply ignored because the UK electoral system forces parties to pander to largely right-leaning centrist swing voters in key seats), but because nobody trusts Labour to deliver them. That's not a perception that popped into existence a few months ago when Corbyn was elected leader, it's the result of decades of mismanagement, of abandoning their base, of capitulating the economic narrative, and of spending more time very publicly warring between themselves rather than taking their supposed opponents to task, all helpfully laid out and editorialised upon at length by the hostile elements of the press.

Labour have another 10 years, at least, of hard work before they'll win another general election, and chucking Corbyn will do nothing for them in that regard unless whoever they get to replace him is more assertive in both the rightness of their own cause and regarding the failings of their opponents, has a solid and principled policy platform that offers a genuine alternative to the Tories rather than just a slightly less offensive variation of them, and has a party behind them that is willing to bury their petty squabbles and tolerate disagreement without both sides immediately running off to brief against each other to the media. Or alternatively, Corbyn could sack up and the PLP could shut their yaps and back him, and they could get a head start rather than dragging everyone through yet another acrimonious leadership debate.

 Yodhrin wrote:

That might have some merit if not for the fact that the legacy of Blair and Brown didn't end with Blair and Brown, the Blairites continued to make themselves felt in policy all through Miliband's tenure as leader(or are we forgetting the "we'll be tougher on benefits than the Tories"/"we're the party of workers not dole claimants" phase?), and now spend their days actively trying to undermine Corbyn with press briefings.

The 'legacy of Brown and Blair' may not have ended when they left office, but it ended as regards the Labour leadership a good eight months ago. I have sympathy for the perspective that the Labour party has a general image problem, but my point here is that Corbyn has done nothing to address it. He's a crap 'leader' by pure virtue of the fact that he doesn't seem to know how to lead. You can say , 'well, it's all those Blairites not pulling together for the team', but I feel very strongly that the problem is on both ends. He's an out of his depth lifelong backbencher with a odd mix of normal, radical, and frankly strange beliefs and policies that's never been a team player in his life. He has no idea what he's doing, and it shows.

I disagree strongly. Whatever Corbyn's flaws, I don't think he could have done better, not because people don't want his policies(check the polls, the electorate is substantially more "leftist" on many subjects than even Corbyn,

Sorry, I don't think 'nuclear disarmament' or 'withdrawing from NATO' or 'mass quantitative easing' are really particularly widespread views. To clarify here, he has more sensible ones too, but there's enough that's controversial in there that I feel reasonably comfortable in asserting that he's not exactly mainstream. For Christ' sake, he even calls it the 'People's Quantitative Easing', like we're some basket case communist state from Eastern Europe.

their views are simply ignored because the UK electoral system forces parties to pander to largely right-leaning centrist swing voters in key seats), but because nobody trusts Labour to deliver them. That's not a perception that popped into existence a few months ago when Corbyn was elected leader, it's the result of decades of mismanagement, of abandoning their base, of capitulating the economic narrative, and of spending more time very publicly warring between themselves rather than taking their supposed opponents to task, all helpfully laid out and editorialised upon at length by the hostile elements of the press.

That's not something I necessarily disagree with, but I still hold Corbyn responsible for doing nothing to alter it. He IS the Leader of the Labour Party, and if he doesn't have the power to start pushing appropriately and changing the image of the Labour Party, who does?! He's had almost a year now, and we've seen nothing but inept fudging. There's been little 'leadership'. He mistrusts his entire party, and sets out to sabotage them and circumvent them instead of converting them and inspiring them. He loudly announces about how he wants everybody's input, when he wants nothing more than force them all to knuckle under and do as he says by diktat. I don't absolve the rest of the party of their responsibility, but he holds the greatest responsibility of them all, that of the reputation and direction of the Labour Party.

And he's fecking it up terribly. Instead of convincing people to trust the Labour Party, he's too busy obsessing about how to control it (y'know, instead of 'leading' it). When combined with his somewhat wacky approach to policy, the result is that people generally speaking, don't want to know. These results are indicative of both his leadership and his policy. Nobody thinks he's much good for anything, and nobody is inspired by him.

I mean, put it this way. He's facing a deeply unpopular Tory Government right now, in the middle of trying not to tear itself apart over Europe. We've undergone large scale cuts, and a lot of protests. Policies over healthcare and education have gone vastly against the current institution. And what can Jeremy achieve in this highly charged and advantageous scenario for the opposition? Minor losses. That's not exactly what you'd call a ringing endorsement of competency.

The losses in Scotland can't be blamed on Corbyn. Labour have been in decline there for years, well before he had a sniff of the leadership.

In Wales too Labour have many problems that opposition parties have been able to exploit. Don't forget they've been in power for 17 years here. When a government has been in power that long it gets harder to maintain your grip. The fact they only lost ONE seat to the very popular Leanne Wood, who herself is very left wing, isn't really an indication that the electorate in Wales don't support Corbyn's policies.

Yes Corbyn is up against an unpopular and fractured Tory government, but let's not forget he has a right wing element within his own party that seem desperate for him to fail.

The whole antisemetism chaos last week was very clearly orchestrated by the blairites to do as much damage to the party in the run up to the elections. Don't you find it somewhat suspicious that these things all came out just before an election? Or that the blairite MP John Mann made a spectacle of himself and Ken Livingstone right in front of a news crew?
It was very deliberate and very obvious what he was doing.

We were told the sky was going to fall in on labour last night, it didn't. There were significant losses for the Tories up and down the country, here in Wales the party has descended upon itself with RT Davies being blamed for their poor showing in Wales.